..
,1 't' j ,, H / , • ;
. ".: .. ; ~ ...
"'"'''
The L1hnry
s. u.:1.11 Srn:nc:c~ & I lununltics Di\' is ion·
Post Ofllcc Box 4 Canberra ACT 2600 Telegrams & cables N,\'rllNIV Canberra Telephone 062-49 j 111
USE OF 1HESES
This nicrofiche is supplied for purposes of private study nnd research only. Passnges from the thesis may not be copied or closely paraphrased without
the written consent of the author.
CHANGING PRINCIPLES OF SOCIAL ORGANISATION IN THE
EXPLORING ISLANDS OF NORTHERN LAU, FIJT
Michael A.H.B* Walter
Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of tho
requirements for tho degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Australian National University
Except where otherwise acknowledged in
the text, this thesis represents the
original research of the author.
i
CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vii
ORTHOGRAPHY ix
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION l
CHAPTER TWO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 19
CHAPTER THREE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A
TRADITIONAL SOCIETY 46
CHAPTER FOUR PROBLEMS AT'l~NDANT UPON
THE ANALYSIS OF CUSTOMARY SOCIAL
ORGANISATION IN FIJI 63
CHAPTER FIVE THE SYSTEM OF DESCENT
IN MUALEVU 70
CHAPTER SIX THE FEAST ORGANISATION
AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL OF CUSTOMARY
SOCIAL ORGANISATION 101
CHAPTER SEVEN RANK AND AGE STATUS:
LEADERSHIP AND
SUCCESSION 125
CHAPTER EIGHT RIGHTS TO LAND 168
CHAPTER NINE THE GROWTH OF INDIVIDUAL
CASH COMMITMENT AND
PRESSURE ON LAND 201
CHAPTER TEN CO-OPERATIVES IN MUALEVU:
PROGRESS AND CONSTRAINT 271
CHAPTER ELEVEN CO-OPERATION AT THE
EXPENSE OF CEREMONIAL 300
APPENDICES
l. The MUALEVU System
of Kinship 344
2.
summaries
of SelectedMUALEVU Disputos Heard
at the Enrlier Lands
commission Enquiries 373
3. 1\ 1Maritime1 Disaster 377
4.
Trnding Accountn and
Balance Shoots of Selected Co-operative
Societies for 1966-7 382
5.
Village
SketchMapa
391Tables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 FIGURES
Average Monthly Rainfall at Selected Stations in Northern Lau
Mualevu Village, 1937: Total
Member-ship of Founder-Lineage Groups
Mualevu Village, 1937: Village
Resident Membership of Founder-Lineage Groups
Mualevu Village, 1969: Total
Member-ship of the Administrative iTokatoka
Mualevu Village, 1969: Village
Resident Membership of the Administrative iTokatoka
MU.ALEVU District, 1969: Total
Membership of the Administrative iTokatoka,by Village
MUALEVU District,, 1969: Village
Resident Membership of tho
Administrative iTokatokn, by
Village
Resident, Migrated and Total
Registered Membership of
Administrative Mntaqali, by
Village
10 Year Averages for Copra Production and Prices, 1882-1961
Known Income and Store Expenditure
of Individual Households in Mualo.vu Village, 1968-9
Households Invontcrios, Mualcvu
Villn.go, 1969
Range and Price of Goods in
D.akuwaqa co-operative Store, Mualevu Village, 1969
Co-oporative Society Order to Suvo,
May 1969
Meals nnd Storo Purchases of
Scloetcd .Mun.lcvu
Uousoholds,26 July - 10
August,
1969I
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27Al l
Al 2
Al 3
A3 1
Daily Income of Mualevu Households
from Green Copra, 25 July
-10 August, 1969
Daily Store Expenditure of Mualevu
Households, 25 July - 10 August,
1969
Population Figures, 1874-1969
Pressure on the Land Resources of Individual Mualevu Households,
1969
Background and Size of Co-operative Societies in Selected Villages Copra Production (in tons) of
Producers in Daliconi Village,
1955-1969
Employees and Wages
Price of Green and Dried copra,
1966-7
Details of Houses Built by the Societies
Actual Receipts from Copra Sales of
Society Members, 1966-7
Estimated Potential Receipts from Copra Sales through Independent
Marketing, 1966-7
Differential Between Actual and
Potential Receipts, 1966-7
Contributors and contributions to a Mualevu Wedding Meal
MUALEVU and Tokatoka Kinship Terms
MUALEVU and Tokatoka Affinal Terms
Marriages by Village, showing
Distribution of Plucc of Origin
of Spouse
MUALEVU co-operative societies'
rnvostments in the Maritime Shipping Association Limited
Diagrams 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
The Official Model of Fijian Customary Social Organisation
Founder-lines
Recruitment Possibilities
Recruitment to the Founder-Lineage Yatusawana, Mualevu Village
Recruitment through Women
Descent Group Organisation and Tabana Division, Mualevu Village, 1937
Feast Organisation, Mualevu
Village, 1937
Occupation and Office Identities of clans in Mualevu Village
The Administrative Model of Customary
Social organisation, Mualcvu Village post-1938
10 Determination of Order of Rank
11
12
Precedence
Age-Status and Succession - the
Villagers 1
Model
succession to the Position 0£
Rumasi Nndave/Tui Nadave
13 Succession to the Position of
14
15
Al l
Al 2
Al 3
~ XQE.Q.
Succ~ssion to the Position of
Tui Cikobia
succession to the Positions of
Tui Mavana and Sa~ Mualevu and
---
Appointments to the--
Offica-
of1illll
MUALEVUMarriageability and Lateral Kinship
Distance in Mualevu
('
v
Maps Page
1 The Pacific
20
2 The Fiji Islands
21
3 The Lau Islands
22
4 The Exploring Group
24
Al 1 The Fiji Islands
346
~tch Maps
1 Administrative Matagali Boundaries
and Individual Coconut Groves in ;'1UALEVU District
( \3.) Vanua Balavu (b} Av ea
( c) Cikobia 193
2 Gardening Strategy in Matagali
Mualevu, Mualevu Village 238
3 Gardening Strategy in Matagali
Valika, Mavana Village 244
4 Gardening strategy in Matagali
Vatulami, Mavana Village 246
AS 1 Mualevu Village
392
A5 2 Mavana Village
393
A5 3 Daliconi Village
394
AS 4 Cikobia Village
395
P.LATES
To follow page I 1. Gusau-coverod volcanic slopes,
north of Mualovu village 62
2. Limostono country, wost of Mavuna village
II l. Fishing with a still lino 62
2. A good catch, using tho lon9 not
III Tocnn9crs~ Munlovu villa9~ 62
IV 1. Tho Chio£ 167
2. MUl\LEVU District elected
v
VI VII VIII IXx
XI XII XIII XIVxv
XVI XVII XVIII Ii X!X vi1. A large cleating planted with
small yam
To follow page
270
2. crotching the large yam
1. Land short~_ cassava planted
in a coconut grove
2. Warnings against taking food
1. Cattle are excellent for weeding ...
2 . . . . if you can afford to buy them
1. Established groves on the coastal flats
2. struggling for growth on poor soils
3. 12 + year old grove yet to bear nuts
1. Uncontrolled burning ••.
2 . . . . and some of its effects
1. Typical copra dryer of the
indepen-dent producer
2. co-operative hot-air dryer, store
and sun drying ra~k~, Mualevu
village
1. Receiving a love
2. fill,~-drinking prior to the division
of the f cast
l. Tho accumulated feast 2. The division
3, The Chief's share
1. A Lauan feast in Suva= part of the
accumulated
feast •••2 •.•. and one of the divisions
1. Yam first fruits presented to the
Wcsloyan Church,
Munlcvu
village2. Doolina of taro cultivation - an unused taro area, Mualovu village
1. Poor man, chief
2. R:i.ch men, commoners
l. A Chiefly burn (for dry weather 'nly) 2. A
commoncr
1s
houso (doublo-storcy witholoctric lighting)
l. A
carpenter •••2 •••. and his chiofly labourer
270 270 270 270 299 343 343 343 343 343 343 343
l. Fashioning an
ironroof to n
trnditionM343
al
ahap~,Munlevu villago
2. Buildin9 ti conerct~-block house, Cikobin village
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My research was enabled by the grant of a
scholarship at the Department of Anthropology and
Sociology, the Australian National University, and
I am particularly grateful to the University for the
facilities which permitted me two field trips. Of
the hospitality I received in Fiji I hold charming
memories deserving far more than the formal thanks
offered here. I mention by name (and in alphabetical
order) those to whom I have had particular reason to
vii
feel grateful: Tawake Apate and Keeaya, Mr and Mrs Ray
Baker, Filipe and Taufa Bole, ~Roi Dakuna and
Elisabeti, Dr and Mrs Peter France, Mr and Mrs Gordon
Mortimore, Vili Niumataiwalu and Mere, Sarni Parrott
and Asinate, Radike and Eta Qereqeretabua, Ratu cola
Serufoama and Mate, Viliame Tukana, Jimi Vakaloloma and Tiln
and Laisa, Ratu Rupeni Vakacegu and Moala and Fani, Dr
Lindsay Verrier, Anare vuiburetu and Leba, Vilia~e
Vuiburetu and Adi Luveluve, and Joeli Yaboni and Kolo.
Most official were extremely patient and
helpful in aiding my enquiries even to the extent of
making available unrequested office space. Where it
was not possible for me to see actual records, I was
invariably supplied with the information that I wa$
seeking. I should like to thank the officials of the
Department of Agriculture, the Department of co-op~ratives,
the Fijian Development Fund and the Fijian Development
Bunk for tho substantial assistance they have rendered.
I must tescrve my 9reat~st appreciation for the kindr1oss
and understanding shown to me by the members of the
Nativa. Lands commission Office - u bowl of 'grog',
an offiee, nnd material from th~ archives willingly mada
availablo mad-0 it p~saiblc for mo to socuro a maximum
viii
My debt to my wife, Elahe Fatimeh, has been
great, in a sense much ~reater than I had ever expected.
She very quickly adapted to village life and as quickly
learned Fijian and proved herself an able, competant
and full-time assistant to me in the field. Her
assistance, however, extended beyond the field when
at a cri~ical time she voluntered to complete the taGk
of typing the thesis.
I wish to thank Paul Alexander, Professor
J.A. Barnes, Professor A.L. Epstein, Dr T.S. Epstein
and Dr A. Strathern for their comme11ts on earlier
drafts of some of the chapters. The time and discussion
which Dr G. Wijeyewardene has ever been ready t.o offer
me has been much appreciated. Keith Mitchell drew the
maps and sketch maps (apart from Map 1) and Helon Dev:i:nc
and Max Rimoldi helped with the diagrams. Hel~n Devino,
Qaiyum and Shafiqa Rafiqi., Max Rimoldi and Tony Vu.le all
helped with the onerous work of proof-reading. Mrs l")o.mcln
Fox and Mrs Dorothy Aune la ~\ss istcd in the typing of tho
ORTHOGRAPHY
Throughout the thesis the 'Missionary'
system is employed except for the phonetic spelling
of 'Tonga' (i.e. instead of Toga). Pronounciation
is as follows:
B is pronounced 'MB' as in 1
number1
c
is pronounced 'TH' as in 'that•D is pronounced 'ND' as in 'end'
G is pronounced 'NG' as in 'sing'
Q is pronounced 'NG' as in 'finger•
In practically all Fijian words the accent is on the penultimate syllable.
CHAPTER ONE
1
E.K. Fisk's study, 'The Politic~l Economy of
Independent Fiji' ,1 was, in the euphoria of approaching
.independence, a timely warning to Fiji's leaders of the
dangers inhering in an economic policy that made increase
in national income an end in itself iegardless of the social and political milieu. There is nothing complex in Fisk's
•
appraisal of the Fijian situation. It is a simple, direct,
common-sense ap~:noach which insists that in. a plural
society such as Fiji's, the widely differentiated
involve-ment
ot'
ethnic groups in the advanced (monetary) sectorof the economy should be the prime factor in the ordering
of priorities of economic objectives. Any concept of
economic advancement that ignores this could only be
advancement into an ever deepening shadow of political and racial strife.
The proposals Fisk makes are, in sum, aimed at
obscuring the ethnic divisions of Fiji society by providing
a foundation for the classical class framework of common
economic interests. The hidden premise is that class
conflict, stil~ hindered to some extent by cross-cuttihg cultural affiniti~s, is less likely to traumatise the
new state than racial hostility. The experiences of Guyana,
Mauritius and more recently Malaysia, the new states.most
often compared with Fiji when its multi-ethnic ch:racter
is discussed, suggest this is well ·founded, thougn Fisk,
himself, exhibits an optimistic faith in the rationality
of economic man which in another context he gives warning
1
against (op.cit. 58). However, with any ,~lternative so
full of the menace of internecine strife tbe optimism
justifies itself.1
Of the existing obsta(:les to the .imploment.d. ti on
of his proposals, Fisk clearly sees the position of Uu11
indigenous Fijian community us prcsentin9 the gr ca t.ost
difficulties. A minority, but a large minority, in lhPir
native land, the Fijians are the least diversified
2 economically, the least committed to a ~-:iash f!conomy.
For Fisk, the principal cause is tho ~ffluenuo of the
Fijians' subsistence economy togctho1 with the security
of a tradi ticmul Wuy of life; it helps enl]andor:
1
For all pructicnl purposes tho subs is tou~·o acct~)r,
howovor affluant, is ossontiully etdqnant. Tho economic advancement of tho Fijians thurofore is confinod to that relatively smaller part of ~heir
nctivi tics that reaches out into tho exchm1qc.~
sector. It is for this reason thnt, whilat tho
othor :r<H·inl qroups in !i'ij i aro tnkin·~ pGrt. in tho vigorouo 9rowth of the advanced on..:-tor of the oeonomy, tho Pijia.ng arc boin,3 loft behind, nnd tho more r:n.pid the rnt.o of 9rmvth "-whieved, tho more rap1dlv will tho PqiLltUJ fa.11 liohind. (op.eit~46).
Tho coed of n clews c:omroun1 t;~t 1Nns lf:h.or'ornod by some
·it.norvcro .in the diuL~ont.cnt of 1''ij13n and Indian oil
i .. orkero that lad to the Suva !Uoto e1f 1".HU (v. Went l:JuO: Nayrlcakalt;u: 1963) thmt,Jh tho riots thm:~oolveo nu.9ht bo torrncd rae1ul in Lhat thoy ~ore auoont1ally an attack on
Eu rotrnnn property - u luot .. iniJ oht>ek for that ~ornmmu t}·.
O'ur Urn off'it:inl toport on tho rHJto
v.
Lmvo:1960). Moro recently the uctivitv uf the tdt"pott anu G<Jteitinc1 Workcto Union (nmv daro,J ~nt.etod), onpce1nll1'• Ui i.t8 prolonged,Jigputo t·,ith QANTAS, r:ould Lo t'c'.)ardctl nn a. hoalthi-' Gi\JH
of an cmbrycm1e clauo otruettu.·c. Not am:;Jtu1,dllV i t t .. au rcF;ardcd no .:lnythirnJ t~H 1
hoalt.h1t'' by Uw Go~·c:rLment, domn~at.cd
n•uN:n .. eGlly b~/ Pi Hann and leJ bV h 1<'.';h""t'nnk s P1 jinn di 10£0.
T!iio, in rrut, l'i..)''1.,,'J.l:J the ,Jder'.'';! i i t ' tho l'.:tJliSOt'Vll.tPJCT,
"htcfl~t lPad(;tu. !~n' tieaU, t_t,t":' !i,aV"J e~·e1;.~thutq to lm10 U'/
~hi eto~1t icft c•f u.n r.,r ... u~ •1neH.:t)/ erwu;.Jqcd }p~' Pick and nthern.
F~ "~~ £•l':c ,,, dc;r'. t ··
11~[. ~r~"~ '-tJ
~ • ilaut~\."U
Fisk advocates that as far as the Fijian community is
concerned the objective of economic policy should be a
drastic re-orientation of Fijian attitudes, not only
3
to vitalise the Fijian sector of the rural economy, but
also to involve Fijians on a permanent basis in secondary
and tertiary industries and encourage their more effective urbanisation.
Prognostications such as~thesc of Fisk, of
the dangers that await Fiji if planning for at lo.:ist a
degree of economic integration of .i n<1i~3cmous Fij ii..u1s
with the res!: of tbe community is i~mored, nr1; not ne-w.
On tho other hand their history is short.
From the inception of British rule (in 1874)
policy has been to govern the Fijians as <:1 scp,::u::u. te
administrative unit, presorvin~ L o culturnl values and
institutions of a traditional Fijian 'W~Y of life, thnt
is as interpreted by tho colonial power. 'l1his policy
naturally fnvourod insulating thu FiJian from tho
tradition-vitiating experiences of contact with a
cash-oricntcdt outside world (itself introduced into Fiji,
it should be ronmrkod, by Europouns). Until tho 1950s
this ndministrativo structure and quasi-traditional
version of Fijian society went un~riticiood by commontatora.
Indeed it was laudod.1 Thero was no query to the
vnlidity and implications c>f such conelnsions as, for
example, thooc of Geddes' rc~~rding the villagers of Daubaa
2 ( eont 1 d from previous paqo)
~~eonomie1lly Activo Population by Raeial G1:oup and Main
4
'And, in the meantime, their state as reviewed here is
a fortunate one in a world in which individualism and
aggression so often over-ride human values.' (Geddes:
1945:6S). Moreover, as a corollary, and in a magnificent
confusion of cause and effect, the high rate of failure
of those attempts by Fijians to become involved in c'-'tsh
enterprises was put down to an innate conservatism in
the Fiji~n. His was a custom-bound outlook determined
by the need of chiefly leadership, by the priority of
kinship obligation, by an addiction to the 'communal
1
system' of life in the village.
The first effective criticism of the Fijian
establishment came in 1959 with the publication of
Spate's official report 'The Fijian People: Economic
Problems and Prospects' (Spate:1959). Compnxcd with
past eulogies, Spate's approach was ruthless in the
way it:. nt:rippcd nnd laid bare the plisrht t)f tho captive
1
In the Fijian literature, the term is most often used
in a very loose way to denote a kind of ethos or way •
of life in the village. It seems to reflect more
faithfully past official notions of what life in the
village should be, notions which \vcrc duly in~orporntcd
into the administrative policy. This .:~ommunal othos
is boat convcyod by tho idea of tho subeorvionco of tho individual's time and labour, his productivity,
to the intarcnts of tho community. The vagucncrns of
i ta praeisa chu.rnctor, hol..vovor, h ets lad to much
mis-undorst:unding - epitomised for mo by tbo ulurh for a
1968
Australian
tclavioionproduction
on rurnl Fijilife which commenced \vi t~. tho pronounccmcmt that n.11
property ia hold in common in tho li'i i iu.n villa.go.
Belshn.w1 inn chapt0r honclm1 'Tho Arnui1Juity of Communalism'
l,i
Fijian villager treading the revolving wheel of his
'Fiji.an way of life' .1 A 'Commission of Enquiry
into the Natural Resources and Population Trends of
the Colony of Fiji' (Burns:l960} quickly followed on
the heels of Spate and, within the limits of its terms 5
of reference, its proposals fully endorsed and suppo1ted
his conclusions. Though the most important of these
proposals were immediately rejected or their
implementat-ion postponed (v. F.L.CaP .. No. 31 of 1960) 2 , the officL1l
and chiefly representation of the n.::1ture of Fijian
rural society clearly lay considerably compromised
under
the impact of these two officially initiated reports.
Further assaults follmvcd. Most notable nmonJ them wns
Belshaw 1
s 'Under the !vi Tree' ( 19 64} , an cx:am:i.nation
of Fijian economic enterprise in the Sigatoka region of
south-west Viti Levu. More recently there has appcilrcd
the geographer Wattors' comparative study of four
villages in different nrcus of Fiji (Wuttcrs:l9b9) . 3
These shocks to tho systom from the observations
of outsitlo exports could not fnil to bring ~bout some
re-appraisal of tho rolcv~ncc of tho administratively
maintained institutional framework of Pijian rurul
society, not only by colonial off1ciuls but by tho
Fi;ian chiefly leadership. Furthermore, i.h.u:itH] the 1960s
the internal political situation \].tu\.,: more tense with
the ever-widening gap botwcon tho dumi.lm:ls of the loaders
of tho majority Indian community and the conearvntivc
A reference to the titla of G.K. R0th'a buok {1953).
2
Fiji Lcyislativo council Papo1.
3
Chcmon by Watt.or~ to re1n:cmont different lcvolt:> \Ji'
c.i;'.'.'ul'l.t:';)mH~ uovelopmont and tJ1.)eL1l change (op.cit. xv).
W<.lttcrn main f.icldt·.,prk tv,1s carried out in 1959 nnd 1959 \vith
further hr1t:f rn:ri,Ydu Ht !f!1,i, 19t>4 cmd 19tHJ. Bnlghmv'o
\
stand of the Fijian lead,rs. As the prospect of
independence became a r -~,, l ! • an: :.· ,t:. merely a
plat-form for Indian orators, tl. ~· ,, ia·: leadership was
6
obliged to consider a post-~ !dep1ndence situation in ~hich
an Indian-dominated administration might come to power
and 'liberate' the Fijian community by legislation.
Thus the economic plight of the Fijian villager, brought
to light by such ~tudies as those of Spute and Belshaw,
had an immediate political significance for the vested
interests of the established system of leadership of
the Fijian community. It wds a significance of some
ominous proportion for them when vi-ewcd in the light
of the small but increasing degree of organised activity,
political and economic, of those urbu.nised Fijians who
had shaken off traditional leadership and direction.1
Within a few years of its unfavourable reception
of the Burns proposals of r~form, Fijian chiefly
leader-ship had accepted the need to dismantle the separate
Fijian administrative framework. Administratively the
foundatiomwere laid for an eventual single system of
local government with the creation of elected provincial
councils. 2 Economically the habiiitation of tho rural
l
A feature of political life in the Colony in the 1960s
has been the ability 0£ tho main Indian opposition party,
the Federation Party, to attruct GUPt,,ort frum tho u:rbnninod
Fijian sector of the population. Tho National Party, the
largest of the minor indigenous Fijian political parties,
formally umalgama·tcd with the Pedm:ation Party in 1968.
i:t\vo hi~h officials in the Nutionnl Fcdoration Party
organisation nro £rom sonior chiefly Fijian families.
2
Fijian Affairs {Provincial councils) RctJUlntions of 29th July 1966. Tho councils were not completely oloctivc,
provision boing made for t:.ho ncmimition of chiefs b~, the
scerotary for Fijian
Affairs -in tho Lauan Provincial
council, fox· r::.:amplu, there tvuro 14 clcet.otl members und 4
7
Fijian community was spearheaded by increased emphasis
on the development of the Co-operative movement and
community schemes, while the ecc~omic awareness and
growth thus achieved came to be regarded as the
foundation of a kind of village self-help approach
through communal projects 'enabling the local community,
from its growin3 resources, to strengthen and enrich its
own social provision, in education and housing and health
and recreation - in a word, to develop itself.' (From
the official report on r~i:al development, v. Hunter:l969:
cap.57.)
In itself this acceptance of the political
and economic realities of the need to identify the
rural Fijian community with the developing nation's
aspiration for economi~ growth, seemed to demonstrate a
real shift in attitude o~ the part of Fijinn leadership.
And yet in terms of the aims and effects of the policies
of rural development adopted, how real has been this
shift? The observations Of outside commentators, and of
many officials in Suva, are that traditional social
organisation within the village persists as tho major
obstacle to economic growth.
Against this general back9round of post 1945
developments, the Lau Islands presented an intoresting
situation for a study of socio-economia change ns well
as promising to provide further understanding of the
strength and persistence of traditional attitudes in rural
Fiji. Tho Lauans possess
u
long acquaintance with thococonut as n crop, reaching hack beyond the beginning c>f
this century. The coconut villug~ri a.re now among tho
richest in Fiji in terms of cash income. Their capacity
. .
. '\ ... -:;:_, ;:.;;.: . ..
.. CJ! ~!~~~ , . . ., '
\
.
.
8
villages by virtue of the compulsory cess (of F$20 per
ton) which since 1951 has been laid on all copra. Local
consumer-marketing co-operatives are firmly established
throughout the archipelago. Finally, Lauan villages
are regarded as being among the most tradition-oriented
in Fiji.
Not only did Lau seem to present for analysis
an ideal case of the persistence of traditional values
in face of economic change, it also offered the
attraction of complementing in different ways the major
examinations of socio-economid change in Fiji that had
already been made (that is up to 1967), nnmely those
of Spate (1959) and Belshaw (1964).
Both Spate und Belshaw were concerned with
the inhibitory effects on ecol'tomic growth of the
Fijian institutional frnmowork, traditional and
adminis-trative, as a factor in the Fijian's ability to adupt
to now sots of values and rntionnliso his behaviour
to-wards the attainment of cash-oi:ientod goals. Spate,
obliged by circumstances to sacrifice depth for breadth,
ranged widely, sampling villa.gos nlmost throughout tho
colony. 1 Among the arcns ho did not visit w<Jrc the
Moalan Group and the Lau Islands. Belshaw, on tho other
hand, localised his fieldwork, concentrating it ~ithin
tho a~.°l.t1inistrntive Province of Nadroga & Nuvosa and for
tho most part in areas link.Gd to markets by road and
river communication. Uoro tho wide range of emergent
ontorprisas, attcndod with varying dogroca of euccoes
l
For a quick reference to spate1a field vieits soc tho
"'~ ·~~.. ... . '
~' ~~~:f1J~f~~ • ' I ~
9
and lack of success, provided him with an abundance of
comparative material for determination of the variables
involved in the Fijians' adjustment to economic changes.
While the studies of Belshaw and Spate relate
to customary social organisation primarily in terms
of its encumbrance of economic growth, my own approach
was intended to be, in a sense, the inverse. It would
be seeking to understand the viability of customary
social organisation, the successful incorporation of cash
resources within a framework of traditional values and
behaviour. This focus, in turn, differentiated it from
sahlins' study of Moalan society1 (Sahlins:l962) where
his emphasis reflects, in his own words, 'a greater
interest in traditional facets of Moalan culture than
in those characteristics thnt manifest n century of
European dominance. 1
(op.cit. 3).
Luu, then,
offered the possibility of acomparative sat of mnterinl which in particular
contrasted a situation uf successful assimilation o±
E:!Conomic development \Vith the strcss-loo.dcd social
scone which Belshaw discovered not so thoroughly hiddan
behind a canvns of ooranity in Nadroga & Navosu Province.
By also oockin1 to isolate tho variables determining
tho individu~l'a adaptability in tho Lnunn situation,
it n.pponrod poss iblo not only to cmhnncc but to extend
l
Moala and islandG of 1.rotoya und Ma.t;uku comprise tho
Moula.n Groupt 'Yasuyasa Moala', which in withit'i the
administrati Hi Provine?c of La.u. My own re:farcnccs to L-1u/Launn nrc to the tuunn nrehipolago
only.
Sahlins• fieldwork on Mon.lu was £rom octobar 1954 to
10
Belshaw's theoretical discussion. Furthermore, in a
more immediately applicable context, an understanding
of the social background to the establishment and working
of co-operative societies1 in Lau would be of particular
value. HBre the significant question to be answered
would be to what extent Lauan Co-operatives could be
regarded as a genuine medium of economic growth within a
traditional social framework, the kind of socio-economic
phenomenon which Pitt (1970) and Lockwood (1971)
describe for Samoa. If this was in fact so for Lau,
then in view of the high priority given the co-operative
form of enterprise in present policies of rural
develop-ment in Fiji, it is clearly important to have some idea
of the potenti.a.l for furthering this independent economic
growth of the FiJian community. This is all the mora
pressing in light of the urgency for economic integration
felt by, for example, Fisk and Watters. Making
specific comparison with Samoa, Watters (1969:2) has
commented:
1
Muny
competent observers think social change shouldbe nccolornt¢d in Samoa to permit much needed
economic dovolopmont. Yet the ruto t\t which Samoans
cbnngc is above all the Samoans' own business: if
thoy
should be forcod to close their schools, shutup their hospitals and halt any or all of the
various uppurtcnuncos of u modern stutc, tho decisions arc entirely theirs. But in Fiji, al-though tho rate at which thoy change is primnrily th€! Fijians• businosD, it is not only their
buainoss: it affects tho futuro happiness and prosperity of other eommunitioo living in tho namo land. Thin doou not moan thnt I recommend
! use nn initial Cf'!)it.nl for co-oporutivon/co-opo:rut.ion
to avoid confusion. Similarly, an
initialcapital
willbo used for •socictios• when the t.orm is used on its
ownthat changes be imposed on the Fijians, but it does mean that every effort must be made to secure the acquiescence of all of them in measures that will no longer insulate society against change.
11
Belshaw rejected the village as a basic unit of study and comparison despite his original intentions of
using it. He did this when he realised the widely
varying nature of association involved in same and
different forms of enterprise he came across or heard
of. He settled instead for the individual cases of
enterprise regardless of their social basis, - whether
they were undertaken by individual, family, group or
community, - without, however, disregarding tho
environmental effects of village social organisation
(v. Belshaw:1964~24-6). My own interest in ti1e
persistence of tradi~ional social organisation, together
with the absence in Lau of that wide range of emergent
enterprise with which Belshaw was dealing, did point to
the village as the appropriate unit for study. Bearing
in mind spate's warning on the diversity of Fijian
villages I resolved not to limit my attention to a single
village. In the ovent I made the Tikina, the administrative
District, which in this case reflected a much older political division, the bounds of my fieldwork.
Having
toselect an aroa
within Luu me~nshaving to choose an
island. I was influenced inmy
decision bore
bythe
locationcf
fieldworkalready
carried out
by anthropologistsin tho pnst - Hocnrt on
central
Lau,pro-1914
(mostly on thoisland
of L.tlkoha, 1though
he nppcnrs
tohavo visited
all thQ islands in thearchipolo.90), nnd Laura Thompson on southern Lau in th(l
c:irly 1930s (mostly on the island of t<abarn). Thouyh
l
ltuc ... n.t held tho !J"-ml of hcat1mastur at th(! scheiul in
12
there are clear advantages for the student of social
change in making a follow-up study of an area, there
exist equally obvious attractions of carrying out
fieldwork in a new, relatively unknown area. Moreover,
Lau is sufficiently homogeneous for Hocart•s and
Thompson1
s works to present useful comparative material
for a study in a fresh area. A fresh area meant, in
effect, northern Lau and a choice between the islands
of Cicia and vanua Balavu. Chance contacts in Suva
helped to decide in favour of Vanua Balavu where my
fieldwork was concentrated upon the eight villages of th e nor er11 Dis r ict, MUALEVU. th ' t ' l 2
Once I was in the field3 it was not long in becoming apparent that the image of an essentially
tradition-oriented, conservative society was an ill-fit
for MUALEVU. It was also apparent that as a consequence
my theoretical design would have to be refashioned.
The decade following the end of the Second
World War seems to have been a watershed in t;ho history
of MUALEVU following which a shift in social attitudes
and values steadily gained momentum. This change was
l
Tho presence of a large Tongan village (the origins and organisation of which hnva bean studied by the Loseings (1970)) ndjoining with the chiefly village
of tho southern District prosontod sufficient additional
complications~ including the learning of Tongan as well
as Fijian, for mo to exclude this southern ar~n from tho main body of my fieldwork.
2
cnpitnl lottorn arc usod to distinguish the District from the villngo and from the soeial unit which carry the snmo nnme.
3
A total of 19 months wua opont in the field in two periods: Soptcmbor 1967 - Soptcmbor 1968,
and
July 1969 - January1970. Both my wife ancl I hfid nequirod a fair
t:ommnnd of tholuniguago
bytho nixth month.
From tho fourth month we
13
readily associated by the villagers themselves with the
individual's growing commitment to a cash income. rt
is notable that it was during this period that MUALEVU
experienced a rapid rise in the potential of cash
income from what is virtually its sole source of cash,
namely copra. This was the time, assert the villagers,
that 'the money path', isala vakailavo, began to gain
dominance over 'the traditional path', isala vakavanua
(lit. 'the path in the way of the land'}. Reconstruction
and analysis of the socio-economic organisation of the
pre-1940 society1 underlined the radical quality of the
post-1945 change. As the people themselves succinctly
put it: 'Before men were important, but now it is land
that is important.'
This is not to say that the 'traditional path'
now lies neglected and lost sight of. custom has not
been swept away overnight, but even the attenuated
version, the compromise which most villagers feel the
obligation and need to settle for, is no longer evaluated
simply in customary terms. The individual's acquaintance
with tho rationale of the cash sector has meant the
values and behaviour progrrimmed by recurrent traditional
situations have become susceptible to the results of the
moro calculated computation of immediate returns and
benefits relative to time, labour and money oxpendod.
Tho ceremonial and kinship-based, distributive economy
chaructorising MUALEVtJ society prior to 1940 hns oontractad.
l
The reconstruction was bnsod on the information of tho
oldor villagors and aided by my accoss to tho Evid~ncc
nooks of the various
Land commissions that have visitod14
Its organisational framework is becoming increasingly
peripheral in the redeployment of resources that is
occurring under pressure from new ne~ds and opportunities
presented by the cash sector.
And yet, despite the villagers' pursuit of
'the money path' at the acknowledged expense of customary
institutions, their conversion to its tenets is not
complete. The logic they apply to countenance the
diminished efficacy of custom, itself falters as a
directive to action in the cash sector of the village
economy. The apparent paradox of economic development
and social change in MUALEVU is the mode of operation
of the Co-operative societies and its acceptance by
the majority -~ the villagers.
In MUALEVU (and elsewhere in Lau) the
co-operative works on principles which are antithetical
to any idea of the maximisation of individual income
-in the sense of maximum cash return for outlay. Tho
advantages of economy of scale to the individual aro
swallowed up in the subjection of his own interest to
that of the communal interest; he who put:.s most in is
by no moans he who tokes most out. In an economic
context, the Co-operatives have a levelling effect: but
the co-operative
has
become more thana
form ofeconomic antorpriso. As the traditional socio- economic
organisation, savaged by tho values of a cash·conscious
society htrn rot.rented upon itself, the co-opcrativo has
fillod t.ho
vacatod
arcns to become now.medium of villagesocio-oeonomic orgnnisntion.
Tho pnradox of the successful
establishmentof
15
interpreted not in terms of the encouragement of economic
growth and of the individual's conunitment to it, but in
terms of a new medium of social organisation that offers
the villager some resolution of the stress g~nerated
by his involvement with cash and disengagement from custom.
Or, perhaps, one should say respite, not resolution, for
the present signs in the villages are that cash demand
is increasing and, as money becomes dear, the Co-operative
is conunencing to generate its own conditions of stress.
The Co-operatives certainly represent an
interesting socio-economic development at a time of
accelerated change. This can be well illustrated by
way of Belshaw's distinction of the contexts of 'economy'
and 'economic growth'. In a discussion of the 'economic'
role of Fijian ceremonial, he conunents (1964:127) that
ceremonial custom may be considered to hinder the growth
1
of the economy since, 'by diverting resources into such
[ceremonial] uses, the growth of the resources themselves
is unduly hindered and their use for increased satisfactions
is prevented. 1 But the notion of economy Belshaw asserts
( 0 p. cit. 12 6- 7) :
l
•.. strictly implies that a person or group of
persons behaves in such a way as to maximize satisfaction with minimum effort and expenditure
of resources. Marriage and allied customs have
not only resisted alien pressure ond attack, but
have inflated with the growth of wealth. We must
assume, therefore, that economic demand for such
activity is highly valued, and that resources
directed to this goal represent valid economic
judgenents in term~ of Fijian life and interests.
In the event Belshaw's conclusion is that its effect
~ • ~ • ' ~fl
..
-.
. . .
' .
16
· What is interesting about the role of the
co-operatives in MUALEVU is that here is a form of
emergent, and emphatically non-traditional, 1 enterprise
which ordinarily would be placed in the context of
'economic growth' (and, in fact, is by both Fijian
officials and economist observers), but in reality is
functioning within Belshaw's context of 1economy1 on
the basis of the same tenets of fulfilment and
satisfaction as Belshaw characterises for the •oconomic'
role 0f ceremonial. Thero is, moreover, a further
contrast with Belshnw's arcn1 where~ cash inflation of
ceremonial c~lsts side by side with a considerable range
of emergent ontcrpriDo. In MUALEVU ceremonial activities
havo d~indlod conoidarubly in both size and incidence
because
..
of tho villagers' roluctunco to inv~lvc thcmsalvonin anything but the minimum cash outlay.
It is clear thut
my
origininl (prcconcaiva<l)notions as to the <~tJmplomcntnrity of tho processes of
social
chungo
in MUALBVU with those observed by Belshawin Nadroga
&
Navosa Province, arc not tanublo. As fnr.w the survival and continuin\3 rolovunco of n customary
1
Ao in other undordcvclopcd coun trios, t,hc Co•opcrn ti vos
movement wu.s wolcomo<.l in Fiji us t;hc form of CG.Sh
ontor-pr 1cc ideally suited to the 1
c:emmmnnl
1 cthoG0£
tradi tionnl
nocict1t·
'rhuGstannc.r
rcma:rko: ''!'ho communalnystem is admirably rmit.cd to eo-opcrativc dovolopmcnt
ind tho idea appeals
atrongly
to thoFij1una•
(1953:228):,i ncrics of rwsumption tvithout baeis. To ... dny it is more
,readily
rcn.liood
by the p~li~y mu.kC?ro of thoundcr-dovolopcd
countrico, largely
bypa1nful cxporionec, that
·co-oporntion
1is a rolativQly
nophintieatodt ~cntornform o! ontorpriOQ that
hao
no inovitablo appeal in 1aimplc1
r1ociet.ion {v. n.lnc r.~innoytn eonunontn ~·m
co ....
opcrativou in17
socio-economic organisation is concerned, MUALEVU could
not be regarded as a tradition-bourtd society.
But there is evident another form of complementa-rity, in terms of the dilemmas and frustrations and the
stress generated in the individual as he seeks to adjust
to the pressures and demands of a cash economy, that exists by virtue of the endorsement of the kind of
conclusions r.eached by Belshaw. For contrary to the
reasons und~rlying Belshaw•s choice of Nadroga & Navosa
'.:J as an area fo-r fieldwork,Mt:JALE:Vt:T was sel€ct.ed for study
on the basis of the we-ll-s·upported· assumption of the
persistence of the traditional ethos of its society.
I hope this study of social chunge in MtJALEVU
will have a wider relevance. I am thinking here of the
general issues and problems of economic growth for
rural Fiji outlined in the earlier part of this int~o duction. If it only persuades some qualification of the
facile generalisations about the
innate 'traditionalism'
of the
Fijian, it will have ~chievedn
grent deal. Theroare two specific points which from the evidence of this
study will need reappraisal. Ono is
Fisk's
emphasison
the deterrenteffect
upon the Fijians' integration intothe
vague society of whnt he terms the 'affluenco.
of the susbsistence economy'. Tho idoa that the Fijian
who does not succeed in the town 'is meroly faced with
tha need to abandon the bright lights und to move back
to tho subsistence sector, whtu•o
,a rcmnrkably
comfortable,secure~ ud-0guatot~ erovidad living, with
many
fewerhours of work remains nocossibl~ j:.Q. .all' (1970:45. My
italics) • The
other is tht:l beli~f; implicit inCo-operatives is an indication of tne value of the
movement as the spea:rheaci (if not the whole spear) of planned economic growth in the Fijian village.
The thesis falls into two discernible parts dealing with MUALEVU society from the 1860s to 1945
18
and what I shall term 'modern' MUALEVU. I give a
specific year for convenience, what is really
significant is that the decade after the end of the
Second World War
was
the period during which wereestablished the premises for the commitment of MUALEVU
society to a cash-oriented economy. The chronological
division is not, however, to facilitate a comparison
of a 'traditional' with a 'modern' society. Indeed,
it was the harvest of assumption and misinterpretation
which usage of the term 'traditional' bountifully yields
that has partly dictated the historical approach, since
it wn.s clear that over the past hundred years MUALEVU
society had experienced some consi<lorablc chun9cs. Much
that has been tagged 'traditional' would be more
npp~opriutaly described by 'innovatory•.
These changes had relatively small effect
un tho existing framework of socio-economic organisation
and this enables n more considered isolation of variables
nf:fcctin9 tho processes of change in the 'modern' period.
But u
further fact that I wish to underline by means of thehistorical approach is that tho entantinl for tho kind
of changes taking place in MUALEVU to-day> had become
implicit in the inatitutional onfiguration ostabliohcd
by
the turn of the century. The re-orientation triggcrrcd off by the post-1945 eneh intrusion ~~e tho rcoult of aehangc in Qmphnsis in tho re la.ti vc priority of orgnnisa ti01Ml
featuros 0£ MUl\tEVU aoeiot~r and not tho eonscqucmec of n
violent. upheaval in a !locicty that \Vi.ls { suppooodly)
. . . ~ \ . .. .
.
,,., ~!:{.t;H L•. g ' • J
. .
CHAPTER TWO
19
A glance at the map of Oceania (v. overleaf)1
reveals Fiji's central position in the south-west Pacific.
When the map portrays communications, the eye is straightaway
drawn to Fiji as the hub of innumerable spokes of sea and air
routes. There is no doubt that the Group fits its modern
description as the cross-roads of the area. Historically, too,
though in a different sense, Fiji has earned this description.
Invariably included in the great ethno-geographical
division of Melanesia, Fiji is yet distinctly march country
where Melanesian and Polynesian ethnic and cultural traits
meet and blend.2 In the interior of Viti Levu, the principal
island, the peoples are somatically and culturally closer to
the Mel:.:inesians while on the coastal areas and in the islands
to the east Polynesian traits are more evident. In the latter
areas ure found that complex of chiefly instit1.\tions and high
degree of social sttatification as.;;ociated with the Polynesian
culturos and these are absent in the interior of Viti Lcvu.3
Polynesian inf lucnce is most apparent in the Lauan archipelago,
the eastern boundary of tho Group (v .. Map 2~ p .. 21 ) , as a
consoquence of a long history of continuous contact, certainly
over the past three hundred years, with the sea-faring Tongans.
The Luu islands {v. Mnp 3, p.22) stretch from l7°s
in tho north (tho island of Nnitnubu) to 21°s in the south
(the Tuvann islands), u distance of soma 300 miles. In the
south, the archipelago veers towards Tongn und the southern outlier, ono-i-tuu, is, in fact, closer to tho main Tongan
l
Map l is based on Taylor:.L965:fucing p.692.
The discovery and dating of the distribution of Lapitn pot:.tory suggcnto tho Fiji mnritimc ureas wore settled by u proto-Polyncrnian race prior to nottlemcn.t in wost:. Polynesia
(v. o.g. Groubo:l9il). 3
0
0,\
l
~,
\
!
~
~ ri:.
%
"':
~
:..,,
~
...,
...
-....
a..
·~
....
C(;
.•
...
u
p '
.. ~.
.
..
\ \
?'.;
~
I
I , I
t i
..
~..
$
u;Ps
~
YASA'WA (]Q
n~s GROU? ~
/)
q
....
UA~':';')~
!S'S
ns0E
"C
VlTI LEVU
• {J>s::;r.
~
,
c'.;.l
~ t • _ : t---S
IT' :e_,
~
t;~$ U'IPE})1:010
.
-YACATA 0 QJ.lAKAGA! KORO•
0.~Elf-l<~
W.'.;VA!A":J t',..-(:;"""\,,..f.t tr' l)
173: E
~NA:RAl
~GAu S£4
M:}Al.A ~
MOALA
GROUP
I •• ,.Mtl:...'h'-'10 T ' " ' <'> 18'.;~
!·lap 2. The Fiji Islands
{(i>TOTOYA 0 0 l) 179°W 11°s
.
)•EX~LORING I).. 6GROUP
D
~
LAU
<;)
.
1s0sOlAKEBA GROUP ,
D
.
I? <:=>
J:ABAAA()
19°S
o~;n i LAU' r TUVANA ISJl ~ ~
!'..)
I-'
/':!)
J'""
"· ""
)p
..,., :'IC ..
f
~~LAUCALA
OAMEA';.J
NAITAUSA~
179° w
0
m1los
~-'~ooo
<""'""!,""~
r
~AVE~) .)
\ q;, \ ) YACATA~
.J4 ~
~
EXPLORING ISLANDS KANACEA VANUA @• 1~tii1ABALAVU ..,.,,p
NAMll\AlA II /.! !! V
SJJ5IH m MIJNIA
()MAGO 0
VATU VARA
($
40
I\ 0 R 0 KATAFAG<!.:r
\J
SH A
MAtUKU
tBO~
/':.
([J)TOTOYA
0
c:iOc1c1A
TUVUCA~
()
@JvANUA VA tu
~
KAOARA
0
•
•
0
Q MOC'E rJ O
"°'
\,J
•
23
islands than i t is to the Fijian capital, Suva. The islands
are enclosed within 180° and 178°E longitude and Derrick
gives the total sea area that they cover as 44,000 square
miles (1965:296) .1 The islands number in the huudreds but
the majority are merely outcrops of limestone ranging from
a few feet to a few miles in length. only 27 of the islands
are inhabited and they represent an aggregate land area of
132 square
milt~s
(ibid) . 2 Of the inhabited islands only two,Lakeba and vanua Balavu, exceed 20 square miles.
With the exception of the island of Yacata in the
north-west, the entire archipelago, together with the islands
of tho Moalan group, form the administrative Province of Lau.
The Province is subdivided into 13 Districts.
There are two Districts in northern Luu. M.UALEVU
District is situated entirely within the Exploring Group of
islands {v. M.up 4, p. 24) and consists of tho northern half of the island of Vanun Balavu, tho islands of Avca and Cikobiu
and tho F1uropen.n-owned freehold island of AdelvacL Thero is a
total of eight villages in tho District. The other District,
LOMALOr.m, has ten villnges. There are seven in tho southern
hnlf of Vanua Balavu, one on the island of susui, another on
tho island of Namalutu, and ono on the island of Tuvuca which
lies
out.sidethe ExplorintJ Group
u.lmost 20 miles to the south.But LOMALOMA also includes the is ln.nds of t<:anucoa, l{et tafaga,
M.:HJO, Naituuba, Vatu Vara; an<l, within tho EXEllorin9 Group, the
iol<lnds of Yanuyat\u and Munia, all of which aro European-own.cd
frcoholds. Apart from Vatu Varu and Yanuyanut thcso islands
have aettlomcnts of Fij inn and !ntliiln labourers unu t.hoir
ocrri<;!k is in.eluding the Moalun group whieh is
..:ldm1nistrn.t-i vollf' part of Lau but lios to tho wcot of the 1.u:ehit>clugo ..
2
r
h<J.vo subtracted the aroa of tho Moalcm group from t.lmf1qurn qivon by
Dorr1ck.
- · - D1ntr1et boundary
""""''""' n()of
• V1ttooo
l"'"'l Fmohold rand
t .. J
t""·' Loa!:Ohold lilnd
t."'.J
• Hill
0 L ... -t..-, • .,1 ...• .,.!* - J "
m1!M
N
24
~ <[) .., lllt'fiftlll
/'1111c1gc•
-o·~
lilllf.!t/11
Pana.~<'
~llp 4? J'he E_xploring G£~l!P• Insl't ind.!£.t!U.m.\
25
families working the coconut plantations.
In the proceeding description I shall confine myself
to the Exploring Group end give particular attention to the
atea included within MUALEVU District.
The Exploring Group lies between 178° 42'W and
179° S'W longitude and 17° 4'S and 17° 25'S latitude. The
islands of the Group are within a large barrier reef,
approximately 75 miles in circumference, which encloses an
area of about 200 square miles. There are four principal
passages through the reef: The Tongan Passage (30 fathoms)
and the American Passage (106 fathoms) are situated in the
south-east and north-ea.st respectively and the shallower
Qilaqila and Adavaci Passages are in the north-west and west.
In the north, there is the sovu series of smaller passages
which arc avoided by the Suva-based inter-island traders.
Easily the largest island of the Explori~g Group is
Vanua Balavu with an area of 21 square miles. Regarded from
the sea, the island has the prospect of a. large land area which
bolios its long, narrow, boomerang shape (tho name mca.ns
'long land'). Its total length is about 14 miles with a
mu:umum width of throe miles. It is situated ut the western
end of tho lugoon, close to tho barrier reef. The island is
surrounded by a fringiny roof varying in width from a few to
several hundred foot: in the south it merges with tho barrier
:roof. 'rho w.:itors outside tho fringing reef abound in submerged
rooflots which make na.v1gut1on a hazard for oven small
out-bourd-motorod punts and have nccossitatod the cmpla.comon.t of
a bcucon oystcm for the guidance of lurgor vossole.
vanua DGluvu is of a
composite geological structurecomprioing both volcanics and limoo tones. 1 'l'ha two arc
1 T0,ehnieal dotailD of tho reek ntruaturc and goologieal
history of the Exploring inlands can ba found H\ Ludd &
26
almost neatly separated into the southern and northern arms
of the island, though the limestone is present at the
southern tip of the island where it then disappears into the
sea to reappear as the island of Namalata. The volcanic,
southern arm is dominated by a central ridge that commences
in the. area where the two arms of the island meet and which
includes the highest peak on the island, Korobasaga (930
feet). The ridge runs the length of the southern arm in a
sweeping curve and for the most part at a height of 300 to
500 feet. In the south it rises higher to the 560 feet of
Koroniivi peak (west of Narocivo village) before meeting with
the limestone area. At intervals in its length the ridge
rises 50 or so feet to form individual peaks. Spurs emerge
on either side of this central ridge often producing their
own minor peaks. Where these spurs reach to the sea they
terminate in rounded coastal bluffs. Between the spurs are
valleys, some with permanent streams in them, many with
well-dofined water-courses which carry water only in times of exceptionally heavy rainfull.
From a distance, the central ridge and the spurs
seem to present an
easy
climb and access, but their yellowishcolour is provided by a tall (up to seven feet) indigenous,
reed-like gruss, gasau, which is extremely difficult to
penetrate without a bush knife of soma sort. Hore and there
tho monotony of the yellow is broken by small patchworks of gardens and sometimes by much larger, blackened areas, tha
result of uncontrolled burning for 9nrdon clearance. The
valleys bctwocn tho spurs, and the coastal flats into whieh
they brc><:1don, arc filled with the green of a flourishing
vogotntion which is almost cntiraly coconut palm. Mangrove
oeeurn in
a
fow shcltcrod plum~s on the custurn, windwardCC.)ast, but. iG vary much more in ov.t.denco on tho leeward Sldc
of tho 1G land.
27
~ontrasted to.the southern arm and, indeed, the dimorphism
of the two types of country, volcanic and limestone, enables
them to be instantly recognized throughout the Group. The
limestone a~ea is far more rugged and except for the occasional
rocky pinnacle is covered with a vegetation of trees and
shrub~ with extensive coconut groves in the interLor. At the
eastern end of the northern arm, the hills reach 700 feet or
more and there is a more complex pattern Qf .n.dges, peaj<s and
valleys than that found in the southern arm. Except at
vutun~i, where there is a narrow flat extending for a few
hundred yards inland, the coastal cliffs along the western
half of this northern arm drop almost perpendicularly into
the sen with u pronounced overhang near the sea surface.
There are 13 villages on Vanua Balavu. All of them
n.re sited on the coastal flats of the volcanic region. Six
are in Utu northern District, MtiALEVU, with three on either
side of the island.
The chiefly village of the District, Mualovu
(popi.1l~1tion
337) 1 is on the windward coust in u wide shallo\'/ hay ovpos1t.c n break in the fringing reef. The coastal flat,here, stretches inland for over u quarter of a mile before
mcrginy into the lower slopes of tho valley formed by tho
vorteb1·nl spurs to tho south and no.rt.h of the v1llugo. The
hiqh central ridge with its ~..fil:!. covering dominates the
b.ickqround of t.hc village; but moving a half-m1lo south, the
ridge suddonly dips to lose than a 100 foot, and between i t
cmd u coi.lSt.Jl ridge there is a wide plain dotted with patches
of .~a~;;:,,,,l!, and scrub. ThJ.s area. hlls u. wnotolar1d uppoarunec
that dis tingu1shcs it. from the .ffi!.Sau areas Qf the lughor
a lopes. ( 'l'hc J:~i j iun t"rm, tnlun t~J.~,1 in used off ieinlly 'to
l
Population f igur~o for the villayoo of MU!\LEVU Din tr iet. n.rc
from my own consus mudo in l9u9r figuros for LOMALOMA Diatriet
ure thoGo of the 1966 ConsuG (v. Zwart:l9bB:24 ) ~
Sl(.ot~h Mlipn uf Muu.lcVU; MJ.\tat'W., D.:llit-'(Jn.i .ind Cikol;i.J
-vilLvJo~i
hutt(• Lccu in1•ludcd in ;\!Jt>cm.Hx'.~.
J
28
denote this particular type of poor, infertile country which
is quite common on the two main islands of the Fiji Group ) .
A network of permanently flowing streams to the no.rth of the
village provides a liberal water supply which is piped from
a small concrete reservoir under pressure sufficient to serve
half a dozen tap and shower outlets in the village.
Less than a mile to the south, separated from
Mualevu by the most extensive mangrove swamp on this side
of the is land, is the small village of Boi ta.ci (population
77) . This village is in a much smaller bay than is Mualevu
and with deeply jutting headlands at both ends of the bay
and an independent coastal ridge stretcring directly behind
the village to the southern headland, there is a
claustro-phobic atmosphere which is accentuated by the cramped space
of tho village itself. There is no supply of running water
close to the village, which has to rely upon a wall and a
concrete rainwater tank, though many of the householders have
their own sma.ller, corrugated-iron water tanks ..
Two and a half miles north of Mualevu is Mavana
(population 340) , the largest village in the Exploring Group.
Although hero, as in Boitaci, village space is at a premium,
there is none of the shut-in feeling of the latter village.
Mavana is situt1tcd in a wide crescent-shnptld bay with the
ridges of two enclosing spurs curving behind and around i t
to reach up to the highest point of the island, Korobasaga.
The uniform concavity of the slope in this
pronoun-~d eurvo hints at its volcanic origin.
on
the seawardside, a lurge part of the horizon is shut out by the bulk of
Avea island. A strcnm which rune thr0ugh the village has
been dammed to form n small, u.rtifi.:ial la.kc i11 t..:hich
women wash clothes and the children play. Water ls piped
from n small concrete
reservoir
in another stream south oftho villn.ryt,. Mavunu suffers tho ineonvcn1cn.co of an o~tonsivo